Split Norwich electorate taking up police station bond

Two weeks ago, Norwich Republican Registrar of Voters Dianne Slopak hosted a voter information session at the Rose City Senior Center. As she was explaining the wording of two referendum items that will appear on Tuesday’s ballot, a shout went up among the crowd. “Shall the $33,385,000 appropriation and general...

As she was explaining the wording of two referendum items that will appear on Tuesday’s ballot, a shout went up among the crowd.

“Shall the $33,385,000 appropriation and general obligation bond issuance … (for) a new police headquarters … be approved?” Slopak read.

“No!” the group shouted back.

And in recent days, along West Main Street, a series of lawn signs urging people to “Vote YES!” for the bond have cropped up.

In the closing stretch before voters decide the fate of what is one of the most costly — and controversial — capital projects to appear before the city in recent years, opinion on the measure remains sharply divided.

In fact, Slopak said this week, the high-profile investment likely played a role in the number of first-time voters who registered at City Hall this year.

“The bond is definitely a motivator, absolutely,” she said.

Norwich leaders in June went public with the concept of building a 57,000-square-foot police department in the former Sears department store at 2-6 Cliff St. If approved, the facility would replace a 20,000-square-foot police headquarters on West Thames Street.

In addition to its 29 holding cells and indoor shooting range, plans call for the construction of a three-story parking lot with 75 ground level spaces for public use.

Since then, the measure has won bipartisan support from the City Council and secured endorsements from Police Chief Louis J. Fusaro Sr. and downtown business owners, who hailed the idea as an essential public safety and economic development tool.

But it has also been lambasted by critics as a poorly planned, expensive and ill-timed proposal unsuitable for an economy that’s rebounding.

Rose Marie Desjarlais, whose West Thames Street home is a few doors down from the city’s current police station, said she understands the city’s pitch but can’t reconcile the price tag.

“I don’t think I’d vote for it. I know everybody wants it, but I’m only thinking of the expense for the older people. How much can they keep raising and raising and raising our taxes?” she said.

Officials plan to repay the bond through property tax increases. Homeowners with a $100,000 assessment would pay about $1,800 more over 20 years, or $90 annually.

Proponents have emphasized the $33 million figure is a “worst-case scenario.” Comptroller Joseph Ruffo said Norwich remains in a strong financial position to receive a favorable rate on any bond, pointing to the 2.6 percent interest rate it received last November on a $9.6 million bond.

Page 2 of 2 - In addition to the police station question, residents will act on a request by Norwich Public Utilities to spend $8 million for expansion of its natural gas pipeline into more than a dozen neighborhoods across the city.

NPU says there must be enough customers signing up for new gas service in an area to guarantee repayment of construction, a funding mechanism that protects those not hooked into the system from having to pay for the work.

Norwich’s charter requires NPU to direct 10 percent of its yearly revenue to the city, and the utility expects to make about $2.5 million per year from the expansion, resulting in a revenue increase of about $250,000 annually for the city.